EDT vs EDP - Not what it says on the bottle?

So obviously we all know that EDP is more concentrated than EDT and should therefore usually project more and last longer, right? I was just wondering though, is it possible that some EDPs are being sold as EDTs? And why? I'm so annoyed by this! I've just been on the Chanel site and in the descriptions for Platinum Egoiste and Allure Homme (stuff and have better than average longevity and projection) they say "The most potent, long-lasting form of men's fragrance." But yet it says Eau De Toilette on the bottle? I guess the most common example would be A*Men I mean c'mon... Eau De Toilette? Who are they trying to fool?

Re: EDT vs EDP - Not what it says on the bottle?

Originally Posted by hednic

I guess it comes down to whether you believe it or not. I tend to believe the concentrations stated.

Me too. I don't think companies like Chanel are lying about their own concentrations. But Chanel is also a good example of a company whose EdTs and EdPs differ in more than just concentration. They actually have different formulas. No 5 EdP is a very different scent from No 5 EdT. Same with No 19. Not sure about the men's fragrances, though.

Re: EDT vs EDP - Not what it says on the bottle?

Some companies avoid using the term "parfum" on fragrances marketed to men because some men might not buy something labelled as such because it sounds too "girly". Trust your nose. If something is sold as both EdP and EdT, the EdP will be stronger, but if it only comes in one strength, the label means very little.

Re: EDT vs EDP - Not what it says on the bottle?

I agree with docluv - there are basically no mainstream companies using the word "parfum" for a male frag (to avoid any possible reference to femininity). If there are two versions, these are usually aftershave and edt, and edt is indeed the stronger one.

There is no law stating what should be the concentration of aromachemicals in an edt or an edp. So it is well possible that a certain edt has a higher concentration than some other edps. And in any case, as pointed out, more than the concentration, what matters is usually the materials used. Some materials last longer or project more than others.

Re: EDT vs EDP - Not what it says on the bottle?

I think your statement is relying on something simplistic that you read somewhere. As someone who has bought hundreds of men's and women's EDTs and EDPs, be assured that most women's EDPs struggle to maintain the strength and longevity of men's EDTs - some famous brand ones barely lasted 4 hours, much to the disappointment of my then girlfriend. I only have a few men's EDPs and they last longer than the EDT version. But I have heaps of other EDTs that last longer than those EDPs.

The woods and leathers in men's EDTs last a lot longer than the florals in women's EDPs. My Joop Homme lasts over 12 days when sprayed on my clothes, while Aramis, Sables, Eternity, Photo, Ducati last about 4 to 6 days, though some of the lighter ones and many of the newer ones don't have that potency. Unfortunately, I have to shower, so I can't do the actual longevity test properly on human skin.
Regards,
Renato

Re: EDT vs EDP - Not what it says on the bottle?

EDT/EDP is just a estimated reflection of the % dilution in terms of alcohol and it is sometimes used as a marketing ploy. I remember how MFK Aqua Universalis was labelled a EDP until MFK Aqua Universalis Forte came out - I still have some of the old samples.

Take the EDT/EDP thing and the fragrance longevity correlation with a pinch of salt. I remember reading somewhere that the addition of alcohol helps to fractionate the perfume oils, hence resulting in the top, middle and bottom notes.

Keep sampling and buy what your nose likes!

Last edited by Stesa; 1st April 2013 at 06:09 PM.
Reason: double posting

Re: EDT vs EDP - Not what it says on the bottle?

Originally Posted by keagz08

in the descriptions for Platinum Egoiste and Allure Homme (stuff and have better than average longevity and projection) they say "The most potent, long-lasting form of men's fragrance." But yet it says Eau De Toilette on the bottle? I guess the most common example would be A*Men I mean c'mon... Eau De Toilette? Who are they trying to fool?

Eau De Toilette is generally considered the most potent, long-lasting for of men's fragrance as Eau de Parfum is rare enough in men's scents that is doesn't exist to the common buyer. So while not the whole truth, not exactly a lie. Advertisement at it's finest.

Re: EDT vs EDP - Not what it says on the bottle?

Chanel calls all of its men's fragrances eau de toilette. That's just their naming system. It doesn't have anything to do with concentration, etc. the %ages that are often cited as describing fragrance concentrations are not firm rules. A house can call any fragrance whatever it wants.

For example, vintage Aramis was called "cologne" until Estée Lauder determined that men would buy something that says "Eau de Toilette" on the bottle. I doubt they increased the concentration- the cologne was potent as hell, and if anything, Aramis has gotten weaker over the years.

Re: EDT vs EDP - Not what it says on the bottle?

Originally Posted by sjg3839

Depends on the potency of the frag itself. Then edc, edt or edp factors in.

^^This! Some fragrances are made to be more potent than others even in the same perfume dilution. And why would anyone want to pass off an edp as edt? That would be financially unsound. Every house and every perfume varies in concentration and longevity but it is always a given that no matter how strong/potent any edt is, its edp version (if there is one), would be stronger.

Re: EDT vs EDP - Not what it says on the bottle?

Originally Posted by TeeTee

^^This! Some fragrances are made to be more potent than others even in the same perfume dilution. And why would anyone want to pass off an edp as edt? That would be financially unsound. Every house and every perfume varies in concentration and longevity but it is always a given that no matter how strong/potent any edt is, its edp version (if there is one), would be stronger.

I don't think that's the case. In fact, for the ones I like, there doesn't seem to be a lot of difference in strength between the EdT and EdP versions of a scent. For example, I don't think Habit Rouge EdP projects more or even has greater longevity that the EdT. They're just different interpretations of the scent - one brighter and fresher, the other denser and darker. With Heritage, I think the EdT may project more than the EdP, and lasts just as long.

Re: EDT vs EDP - Not what it says on the bottle?

Originally Posted by rubegon

I don't think that's the case. In fact, for the ones I like, there doesn't seem to be a lot of difference in strength between the EdT and EdP versions of a scent. For example, I don't think Habit Rouge EdP projects more or even has greater longevity that the EdT. They're just different interpretations of the scent - one brighter and fresher, the other denser and darker. With Heritage, I think the EdT may project more than the EdP, and lasts just as long.

That's a good point. Though, technically the difference should be due to the amount of fragrance per bottle, at least that was my understanding but you are right, sometimes it boils down to a difference in interpretation. It's all such a blur even within the same fragrance houses!

Re: EDT vs EDP - Not what it says on the bottle?

the way I see it is... the easier a note is to pick up by the nose for example tonka beans, the more the fragrance will project. However in terms of alcohol, the more alcohol there is in a fragrance the more it will project. The less alcohol and more oils there are in a fragrance the less it will project but the longer it will last.

Re: EDT vs EDP - Not what it says on the bottle?

Originally Posted by TeeTee

That's a good point. Though, technically the difference should be due to the amount of fragrance per bottle, at least that was my understanding but you are right, sometimes it boils down to a difference in interpretation. It's all such a blur even within the same fragrance houses!

Traditionally, it should be purely a matter of concentration, but I think this really applied more to fragrances in the past, when EdCs were meant to be splashed on, and parfums were almost oils that were dabbed. Guerlain and a few other still do this, but its pretty uncommon now. Nowadays, when something is released in EdP and EdT, it's usually more like one is a flanker of the other - typically the EdP is sweeter or more complex, better suited for evening or cold weather. I wouldn't be shocked to learn that some EdPs have a lower concentration of fragrance oil that their EdT version.

Originally Posted by Atticushero

the way I see it is... the easier a note is to pick up by the nose for example tonka beans, the more the fragrance will project. However in terms of alcohol, the more alcohol there is in a fragrance the more it will project. The less alcohol and more oils there are in a fragrance the less it will project but the longer it will last.

Some perfume components have a much stronger perceived scent at a given concentration, and are used in lower concentrations to get a given effect. Civet, for example, is very potent, and its typically used in very small amounts. Iso E Super can be used in huge amounts, on the other hand, without being overwhelming. However, I think this is somewhat independent of projection, as you can have something that is very strong, but stays relatively close to the skin. Not sure though.

I totally agree about alcohol - the more there is, the more the fragrance is 'lifted' off the skin as the alcohol evaporates - but this causes it to burn out faster. It's like a fire - if it burns brightly it will consume its fuel more quickly.

Re: EDT vs EDP - Not what it says on the bottle?

I don't believe anything these companies advertise anymore. It seems to me that a lot of EDP's these days are only slightly stronger than the EDT versions. Some EDP's of today remind me of what I used to get as an EDT in the 80's for a 1/3 of the cost !

Terre De Hermes Parfum was one exception. MAN that thing is HEAVY.

I'd reach for an EDP over an EDT these days but I wouldn't believe what people say about the strength unless I try it first.

Re: EDT vs EDP - Not what it says on the bottle?

Originally Posted by keagz08

So obviously we all know that EDP is more concentrated than EDT and should therefore usually project more and last longer, right?

Actually, no. A higher concentration doesn't mean it'll project more. In fact, sometimes, a higher concentration makes a scent heavier and sit closer to the skin. I like Hanae Mori HM. On my skin, the EdT projects more than the EdP (and, yes, I compared them side by side). Also, the EdT seems to last longer than the EdP even though I expected the opposite. I said "seems to" because the EdP becomes much closer to the skin, which means it's easier for my nose to keep noticing the EdT as the hours pass.

Originally Posted by keagz08

I was just wondering though, is it possible that some EDPs are being sold as EDTs? And why? I'm so annoyed by this! I've just been on the Chanel site and in the descriptions for Platinum Egoiste and Allure Homme (stuff and have better than average longevity and projection) they say "The most potent, long-lasting form of men's fragrance." But yet it says Eau De Toilette on the bottle? I guess the most common example would be A*Men I mean c'mon... Eau De Toilette? Who are they trying to fool?

Strength isn't just how concentrated a scent is. Strength, in terms of longevity/sillage/projection/etc, is based on how strong the ingredients are, both individually and especially when combined. Some ingredients (and combinations of ingredients) are so powerful they require being diluted more than others. That's why some EdT scents can be so strong and some EdP can still seem soft and even a little weak.

- - - Updated - - -

Originally Posted by rubegon

Some perfume components have a much stronger perceived scent at a given concentration, and are used in lower concentrations to get a given effect. Civet, for example, is very potent, and its typically used in very small amounts. Iso E Super can be used in huge amounts, on the other hand, without being overwhelming. However, I think this is somewhat independent of projection, as you can have something that is very strong, but stays relatively close to the skin. Not sure though.